Re: How to set custom Plugin Parameters?

2006-09-01 Thread Alexis Midon
thanks all for your answers, actually the problem as not due to 'protected' modifier nor to 'expression' attribute. Something was wrong with my pom. The command I use is: mvn mygroupId:foobar:copyfile Configuration was not taken into account when I write: plugin

Re: How to set custom Plugin Parameters?

2006-09-01 Thread Jared Bunting
Sounds like the phase thing might point at the problem - say you had two executions defined. This is useful if you want to define the same goal (or different goals) to be run in different phases. But, just running it from the command line, how would maven know which one to use? Following this

Re: How to set custom Plugin Parameters?

2006-09-01 Thread Alexis Midon
What you say is right but my pb is the following: my plugin is an aggregator style, which means I want only one execution on the root pom. If I set a phase this behavior does not happen! my plugin will be executed once per sub-pom :( On 9/1/06, Jared Bunting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds

How to set custom Plugin Parameters?

2006-08-31 Thread Alexis Midon
Hi all, I'm currently writting a custom plugin, but I've got a problem with the parameter settings. Here is it: My plugin declares a String array as follow: /** * The collection of exclude patterns to be applied on the sourceDirectory * * @parameter */ protected String[]

Re: How to set custom Plugin Parameters?

2006-08-31 Thread Ovidio Mallo
Hi Alexis, you may try with @parameter expression=${excludes} in the annotation of your array. I can't test it right now, but I guess this should work. Regards, Ovidio Alexis Midon wrote: Hi all, I'm currently writting a custom plugin, but I've got a problem with the parameter

Re: How to set custom Plugin Parameters?

2006-08-31 Thread Jared Bunting
Another thought - the guide here talks about using private fields for mojo configuration - i noticed that yours is protected. It specifically mentions that setters can be used in place of private fields, but makes no mention of protected fields. Now, while it would make sense to me that the